No, or at least, I'm pretty sure not.

My basis for this belief is that in general the theory is much more developed for the maximal pro-p-quotient of the groups you're asking about, and even in this more explored setting not a single explicit presentation of an infinite such group is known (to me, for sure, but I think to anyone). In fact, this is true even if we generalize to ask about the Galois groups $G_{S,p}(K)$ of maximal $p$-extensions unramified outside of a finite set of primes $S$ (with some tameness conditions on $S$ -- obviously taking $K=\mathbf{Q}(\zeta_p)$ and $S$ as the set of primes above $p$ gives a counterexample to my claims.) Let me elaborate.

What we do have are certain approximations to presentations for such groups. The details get somewhat technical, but if you consider a pro-$p$ presentation of $G_{S,p}(K)$: \begin{align*} 1\to R\to F\to G_{S,p}(K)\to 1, \end{align*} where $F$ is a free pro-$p$-group, then in some cases (for example, $K=\mathbb{Q}$) you can find an approximation to a minimal generating set for the relation module $R$ in the sense that you can give an explicit description of these generators in some quotient of $F$, e.g., modulo the third step in the lower central series of $F$. (Actually, it's the "Zassenhaus filtration" for which the results are sharpest.) A lot of authors have written on this idea, which roughly originated with Koch -- I'd recommend NSW's "Cohomology of Number Fields" for an overview, and then work of Morishita, Vogel, or possibly myself for more details. In brief, these approximations are determined by the arithmetic of $K$ and $S$ (e.g., $p$-th power residue symbols or other class-field-theoretic symbols evaluated at the primes in $S$). This was a fairly resounding triumph of the theory -- it would be outright revolutionary to lift these congruences of relations mod $F_3$ to literal equalities in $F$.

Let me finish by bringing the general case back toward your original unramified setting. The relevance of the more general case is as follows: Say, for example, that you have a quadratic extension $K$ of $\mathbb{Q}$ and would like to know its maximal unramified 2-extension. If we let $S$ be the set of primes dividing the discriminant of $K$, then the maximal unramified 2-extension of $K$ corresponds to an index-2 subgroup of $G_{S,2}(\mathbb{Q})$, which is, as above, difficult to get ones hands on (if infinite). Finally, I should also mention work of Boston conjecturing explicit presentations for $G_{S,p}(K)$, though even here, the unramified case is less concrete.

No, I'm pretty sure not.

In general, the theory is much more developed for the maximal pro-p-quotient of the groups you're asking about, and even in this more explored setting, not a single explicit presentation of an infinite such group is known (to me, for sure, but I think to anyone -- Edit: Nigel Boston appears to concur in his survey paper Galois $p$-groups unramified at $p$). In fact, this is true even if we generalize to ask about the Galois groups $G_{S,p}(K)$ of maximal $p$-extensions unramified outside of a finite set of primes $S$ (with some tameness conditions on $S$ -- obviously taking $K=\mathbf{Q}(\zeta_p)$ and $S$ as the set of primes above $p$ gives a counterexample to my claims.)

To elaborate, what we do have are certain approximations to presentations for such groups. If you consider a pro-$p$ presentation of $G_{S,p}(K)$: \begin{align*} 1\to R\to F\to G_{S,p}(K)\to 1, \end{align*} where $F$ is a free pro-$p$-group, then in some cases (for example, $K=\mathbb{Q}$) you can find an approximation to a minimal generating set for the relation module $R$ in the sense that you can give an explicit description of these generators in some quotient of $F$, e.g., modulo the third step in the lower central series of $F$. (Actually, it's the "Zassenhaus filtration" for which the results are sharpest.) A lot of authors have written on this idea, which roughly originated with Koch -- I'd recommend NSW's "Cohomology of Number Fields" for an overview, and then work of Morishita, Vogel, or possibly myself for more details. In brief, these approximations are determined by the arithmetic of $K$ and $S$ (e.g., $p$-th power residue symbols or other class-field-theoretic symbols evaluated at the primes in $S$). This was a fairly resounding triumph of the theory -- it would be outright revolutionary to lift these congruences of relations mod $F_3$ to literal equalities in $F$.

Let me finish by bringing the general case back toward your original unramified setting. The relevance of the more general case is as follows: Say, for example, that you have a quadratic extension $K$ of $\mathbb{Q}$ and would like to know its maximal unramified 2-extension. If we let $S$ be the set of primes dividing the discriminant of $K$, then the maximal unramified 2-extension of $K$ corresponds to an index-2 subgroup of $G_{S,2}(\mathbb{Q})$, which is, as above, difficult to get ones hands on (if infinite). Finally, I should also mention work of Boston conjecturing explicit (non-approximate) presentations for $G_{S,p}(K)$, though even here, the unramified case is less concrete.